home

Total Erika

cronologia di un disastro ambientale

Introduction - Introduzione

Over the last 7 years, there has been much discussion over the course of events leading up to the Erika Tragedy.

Long obscured by a labyrinth of shell businesses and holding companies, only now have the details the ownership and safety oversight of the ship itself come to light.

The information below allows the open-minded observer to see beyond the emotionally charged rhetoric, and draw informed conclusions regarding the processes and individuals responsible for this environmental disaster.

Shipowner - Armatore:Tevere Shipping

The Principal Shareholder of Tevere Shipping is Giuseppe
Savarese, owner of the Erika since 1996.Savarese lives in London
and is personally responsible for finance, administration, legal, commercial,
hull and machinery insurance and P&I insurance matters.

Ravenna-based corporation incorporated in 1997. The Pollara and Vitiello families each own 50
percent. The company did not employ a
specialist in naval architecture or vessel strength which is typical for such
companies. With regards to maintenance,
Panaship defined the scope and nature of maintenance work in addition to
creating and evaluating calls for bids for such work. All decisions were submitted to Guiseppe
Savarese.

Flag State - Bandiera:Malta

(Foundation Registro Italiano Navale ed Aeronautica) Based
in Genova.Malta like most Flag States
delegates compliance with International Safety Management Code of International
Maritime Organization to Classification Societies.RINA issued all safety certificates for the
Erika.

oRINA
and Panaship refused to provide a copy of this initial report to authorities.

·February-March
1998 –IACS (International Associations for Classification Societies) rules
require the shipowner and classification society to create a survey plan
(including thickness measurements) in writing to establish specifications for
repairs.RINA interviews reveal that
this did not happen, however, Panaship communicated a call for bids to Bijela and
other shipyards during this time.

oCastigliola
(Panaship) drew up the technical aspects for the call for bids during the early
months of 1998 but before Erika’s transfer of class to RINA.Based on the lack of physical evidence (i.e.
written reports) he could have only based these specifications on thikness
measurements taken in Ravenna
in 1997 and RINA’s pre-transfer inspection in February 1998.Neither sufficient to determine the extent of
work necessary.

·June
17-August 1998 – Maintenance work carried out at the Adriatic Shipyard in
Bijela pursuant to Panaship’s rules and under RINA supervision on the basis of
RINA rules

oCastigliola
(Panaship) and Patane (RINA surveyor) inspected the entire ship and marked the
deck structures and web frames to be replaced.

oDuring
special surveys, extended thickness measurements of the structures are taken by
specialists approved by classification societies.In this case Vincenzo Paolillo for RINA and
the Erika.For practical reasons,
thickness measurements must be taken when a ship is in dry dock because many of
the places where readings are to be done are inaccessible due to liquid in
tanks, etc.The classification society
(RINA) contracted Pailillo to undertake the readings as a specialist, however,
RINA is wholly responsible for verifying a sample of these readings and for the
close-up surveys.RINA is also
responsible for the instructions given to the Shipyard regarding the results of
the thickness readings.

oAll
measurements were completed on July 12 (according to Paolillo) or July 3
according to RINA’s documentation.

oPaolillo’s
final thickness report is dated June 19, 1998.This is not possible because if it were
completed at this time, it would have served as the basis for Panaship’s
instructions to Adriatic Shipyard.RINA
did not receive Paolillo’s thickness report until September 9, 1998, a full month
after the interim certificates were issued.

oThe
deck structures were reportedly replaced on July 7, 1998

oThe
web frames were reportedly cut out on July 24, 1998.

oStatements
and reports from Patane (RINA), Costigliola (Panaship) and Paolillo (hired by
RINA) are inconsistent with regard to the extent of scaffolding used in
repairs, the dates of repairs, and the dates each was in Bijela.

oTheir
statements included the claim that most of the tanks were examined by using a
raft and filling the tanks with water.This is impossible when a ship is in dry dock.

oSubsequent
review of Paolillo’s Final Report on the thickness readings showed a large
number of discrepancies indicating that it performed inadequately or not at
all.Anomalies include:

§The
total number of readings reported were 7,842, while a ship of the Erika’s size
would require no more than 5000.

§The
report includes readings for structures that did not exist on the Erika, such
as a section of the deck E7. These readings were fabricated.

§There
were no readings for structural elements that did exist-the plating and
longitudinal bulkheads.

§Certain
readings were thicker than when the ship was constructed.

§Certain
readings showed such slight deterioration that is inconceivable for a ship of
that age (in ranges of 2-6%).

§Thickness
levels of some standard sections varied by factors of 2 or three-this is
technically unjustifiable.

§The
document is not dated (other than the cover page dated June 19).It was in all likely prepared in July 1998
and approved by RINA (Patane) no later than September 9, 1998.

oThe
undisputable type, scope and number of anomalies found in the Paolillo Report means
that it in no way reflects actual measurements taken in Naples (the last port of call) or Bijela.

oPaolillo
refused to meet with the Dunkirk
Commercial Court in 2005 and claims the computer
used to make all measurements on the Erika was stolen in 1999.

oRINA
agreed to class the ship after repairs were carried out at the time of
comprehensive five-year special survey’ in July 1998.

·August
15, 1998 - At the conclusion of the post-maintenance survey in the Erika
received all interim certificates without reservations from RINA and the class
was officially transferred to RINA.

·August
21, 1998 – Adriatic Shipyard issues invoice for $715,000 of which only $157,000
was for structural work.The call for
bids had called for 124 tons of plating at a price of $257,228 but the shipyard
only replaced 19 tons.